ArticleJMIR human factors2024
Usability of an App for Medical History Taking in General Practice From the Patients' Perspective: Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Does an app make patients happy? Impact of a novel medical history app on patient satisfaction in urgent care consultations in Germany: cluster-randomized interventional trial 'DASI'.BMC health services research · 2026Trial
- Patients' and Providers' Attitudes Toward Artificial Intelligence and Electronic Health Record Use in Deep Phenotyping and Rare-Disease Screening: An Empty Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Evaluating the Effectiveness of Nonpharmacological Self-Management Interventions for Persistent Pain: Protocol for Single-Case Experimental Designs.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Appropriateness and utility of a clinical decision support system at the digital front door.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Taking a closer look: Can an app improve diagnostic accuracy in urgent care? Cluster-randomized interventional trial DASI.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Leveraging User-Centered Design and Usability and Skills Testing for a Novel Diabetes Survival Skills Toolkit.Journal of the Endocrine Society · 2025Article
- Patient Perspectives on Digital Technology and Experiences of Computerized History-Taking for Chest Pain Management in the Emergency Department: CLEOS-CPDS Prospective Cohort Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- Italian Version of the mHealth App Usability Questionnaire (Ita-MAUQ): Translation and Validation Study in People With Multiple Sclerosis.JMIR human factors · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA future shortage of physicians, especially in general practice, will result in an increasing workload for health care providers as a whole. Therefore, it is important to optimize patient-encounter processes to increase time efficiency related to visits. Utilizing digital tools to record patients' medical histories prior to a consultation offers great potential to achieve this goal. The collected information can be stored into the practice's electronic medical record, allowing for the general practitioner to review structured information of the patients' complaints and related medical history beforehand, thereby saving time during the encounter. However, the low usability of new digital developments in this setting often hinders implementation.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the usability of an app designed for medical history taking in general practice to capture the patients' perspective.
methodsBetween November 2021 and January 2022, we recruited 406 patients with acute complaints in one out-of-hour urgent care and seven general practice clinics. These study participants used the app during their waiting time and subsequently assessed its usability by completing the System Usability Scale (SUS), a robust and well-established 10-question survey measuring the perceived usability of products and technologies. Additionally, we collected general participant information, including age, sex, media usage, health literacy, and native language. Descriptive and inferential statistics were applied to identify patient characteristics associated with low or high SUS scores.
resultsWe analyzed data from 397 patients (56.7% female, 43.3% male). The mean total SUS score was 77.8 points; 54.4% (216/397) of participants had SUS scores of 80 points or higher, indicating high usability of the app. In a multiple linear regression predicting SUS score, male sex and higher age (65 years or older) were significantly negatively associated with the SUS score. Conversely, a higher health literacy score and German as the native language were significantly positively associated with the SUS score.
conclusionsUsability testing based on the SUS anticipates successful implementation of the app. However, not all patients will easily adapt to utilizing the app, as exemplified by the participants of older age in this study who reported lower perceived usability. Further research should examine these groups of people, identify the exact problems in operating such an app, and provide targeted solutions.
trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register World Health Organization Trial Registration Data Set DRKS00026659; https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=DRKS00026659.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.